Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Home Topics

Litigation

Columns & Departments

Development

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

Cases involving an air stripped in a park, and failure to maintain a landmarked building.

Columns & Departments

Landlord & Tenant

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

Several key rulings are discussed.

Columns & Departments

Real Property Law

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

In-depth analysis of the latest important rulings.

Features

Alabama High Court Wrongful Death Decision Sets Stage for Increased Provider Risk Image

Alabama High Court Wrongful Death Decision Sets Stage for Increased Provider Risk

Janice G. Inman

A look at a recent case decided in the Supreme Court of Alabama that concerns questions of the personhood of a nonviable fetus for purposes of a wrongful death action.

Features

<i>He, Cuevas</i> and the Law of Remittitur in New Jersey Image

<i>He, Cuevas</i> and the Law of Remittitur in New Jersey

Robert E. Spitzer

Despite the established purpose of a compensatory damage award, there are occasions when a verdict is so excessive it could only have been arrived at in an effort to punish, rather than to compensate. In those instances of a "runaway" jury award, there are two generally recognized forms of relief available to address the excessive verdict: a new trial as to damages only, or remittitur.

Columns & Departments

Drug & Device News

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

Teva has agreed to pay $520M to settle an FCPA complaint. Here's why.

Columns & Departments

Med Mal News

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

A look at a potentially chilling attorney sanction in Pennsylvania.

Columns & Departments

Verdicts

ljnstaff & Law Journal Newsletters

In-depth analysis of a case in which a jury did not receive all evidence.

Features

Expert Witnesses: Observing the Limits of Expertise Image

Expert Witnesses: Observing the Limits of Expertise

David A. Martindale

Life-altering opinions are also being offered by file reviewers (work product reviewers), some of whom seem to be oblivious to, or unconcerned about, the inherent limitations of a file reviewer's data.

Features

Bias in Custody Evaluations Image

Bias in Custody Evaluations

Jeffrey P. Wittmann

Evaluator bias can interfere with the noble goals of effective and reliable forensic work and lead to the court being misled.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug &amp; Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.
    Read More ›